BROTHERHOOD of Sf LAURENCE

Strategic Planning Think Tank 4 September 1998

Participants

Fred ArgyH Terry Cutler

1

Morag Fraser 1

Linda Hancock 1 1 External advisers

Betty Hounslow 1 Brim Howe Mark Lyons

1

Fergus Ryan 1

Sheila Shaver 1 1

**not attending, will contribute in writing

Sandy Clark Mike Feeney

1 1 BSL Board Members

Jim Minchin 1 Merle Mitchell 1

+Michael Challen Paul Bird Lesley Dredge Alison McClelland

Executive Director & Board Member Director of Finance Director of Community Services Director of Social Action & Research

BSL 'Think Tnnk'for the Strntegic Plnn 1999-2002

Where? The Brotherhood of St Laurence, 67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy In the Upper Millott meeting area (directions available from Reception on arrival)

. . When? Friday, 4 September from 2pm (1.45pm for 2pm) until 9pm

Timetable:

2.00-2.15 Introduction of participants and the context of the day

2.15-5.45 3-minute presentations on specific areas with follow-up conversations

2.15-2.20 Presentation on Economics and Teclrnical Advnnces (Terry Cutler)

2.25-3.00 Follow-up response 3.00-3.05 Identification of key understandings for the BSL

3.05-3.20 Afternoon Tea

3.20-3.25 Presentation on Social and Cultural Aspects (Morag Fraser)

3.25-4.10 Follow-up response 4.10-4.15 Identification of key understanding for the BSL

4.15-4.20 Presentation on Political and Public Attitude Aspects (Brian Howe)

4.20-5.05 Follow-up response 5.05-5.10 Identification of key understandings for the BSL

5.10-5.45 Overview of the key understanding and any additional issues How do we identify what is to be among the priorities for the BSL?

5.45-6.00 Pre-Dinner drinks 6.00-7.0 Dinner

7.00-8.30 A conversation about what the Brotherhood's response might be ... Short observations about what is influencing the sector's capacity for response and the nature of the sector's response (Mark Lyons, Betty Hounslow)

7.15-8.15 Follow-up response 8.1 5-8.30 Identification of key understandings for the BSL

8.30 Summary, 'where to from here' and close

BROTHERHOOD of S! LAURENCE

67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 3065 Victoria Australia Telephone: (03) 9419 7055 Facsimile: (03) 9417 2691

DX 282 Melbourne

10th August 1998

Dr Terry Cutler Cutler & Company 7 Leveson Street NORTH MELBOURNE 3051

Dear Terry,

Re: Brotherhood of St Laurence "Think Tank" for Strategic Plan 1999-2002 Friday, 4th Sepetmber 1998

First of all, thank you for accepting my invitation to assist the BSL with its strategic thinking by participating in this "think tank" on the global, local, economic, social and political context we have to operate in.

More specifically is to identify those opportunities, needs or issues that the BSL will need to seize, respond to or contend with through its next three year strategic plan, 1999-2002.

The meeting is restricted to approximately 15 people with eight people or more from outside the BSL, three from its Board together with the four members of its Executive Council. I attach a list of participants.

The procedure will be for the participants as a whole to consider various sectors of our context. The attached point to what some of those sectors might be. I would welcome your own thoughts as to what elements ought to be considered. These can be faxed to me directly on (03) 9486 9724 by 24th August. The Executive Council needs to have the opportunity to be broken out of its own presuppositions and perceptions.

By way of background, I also enclose key pages from our current ('96-'98) strategic plan.

With gratitude,

Yours sincerely,

The Right Reverend Michael Challen Executive Director

Attach

BSL THINK TANK FOR STRATEGIC PLAN 1999-2002

The following is to indicate possible areas of human activity which might create opportunities, raise needs, pose threats and thus require the BSL to change as it plans strategies to advance the wellbeing of low income people through positive social change.

A. External to "Welfare" and the BSL

1. Economics international Asia-Pacific Australian

2. Technological Advances new possibilities who benefits/who loses out

3. Social/Cultural views of "society" quest for community form of "welfare state" dominant values demographic changes vulnerable groups

4. Political philosophical/policy orientation of governments smaller/larger government

5. Public(s) regard for welfare perception of BSL

B. Internal to "Welfare" and the BSL

1. Prevalence of poverty New trends/groups

2. Changes in Public Policy employment social wage (housing, education, community services) tax regime social securit)i

3. Welfare Sector emergence of new peak (Church) bodies; impact upon VCOSS, ACOSS competition/co-operation between service deliverers BSL relating to governments with respect to service

delivery and public policy competition for community support and money key opportunities/needs requiring new service

responses

VISION STATEMENT

The Brotherhood of St Laurence is a Christian organisation

committed to a just society through identifying with and being involved with

the poor and disadvantaged.

MISSION STATEMENT

We of the Brotherhood of St Laurence work for the well-being of the poorest members of the

Australian community to improve their economic, social and personal circumstances by:

+ offering friendship, support and advocacy;

+ sharing goods, services and resources;

+ contributing to their empowerment and to the prevention of

further poverty;

+ improving the structures, institutions and distribution of resources to

establish their security of income, shelter and employment; and

+ working towards achieving a sustainable Australian society

within the global community.

Page 1

INTRODUCTION

T his Strategic Plan for the period 1996-1 999 is to enable the Brotherhood of St Laurence (BSL) to achieve specific objectives in the areas of community services, social action and management which arise from its Christian foundation, values and vision.

During the next three years, the BSL expects:

unemployment to remain at an unacceptably high level;

that inequality and poverty will continue to be a substantial problem;

that governments at all levels, in withdrawing from direct community service delivery, will be putting programs out to others through competitive tendering and promoting different types of community service delivery models; : that fundraising will occur in a fiercely competitive environment; and

that the Australian economy will be increasingly effected by Australia's exposure to the Asia-Pacific region;

During this period, the organisation aims to make truly operative throughout the organisation the key recommendations of the Directions 2000 Review, namely,

3 the new management structure;

3 the application of the three frameworks, The Brotherhood's Operating Charter, Guiding Principles for Service Involvement, and Decision Criteria for Service Participation;

adequate reporting through the Strategic Management Framework;

the pursuit of positive social change through community services and social action and with special measures to offset the entrenchment of poverty; and

3 securing the BSL's financial base.

The preparation of this Strategic Plan has been a matter of urgency so the involvement of all BSL stakeholders was less than what would have occurred if more time had been available. Nevertheless, the Strategic Plan has included consultation with BSL staff.

The Executive Council initially met to identify the Goals and Key Outcomes. These were then referred to the Board and senior management for amendment and acceptance. Six Goals were identified and the Plan illustrates our strategic approach for achieving these goals, which are considered to be the key objectives for the next three years. Each Goal is supported by the Key Outcomes we expect to achieve, the Slrategies we will undertake and the Performance Indicators for measuring Goal achievement.

Page 2

Managers were asked to submit proposals which could be components of the strategies. Over 200 were received covering current operations, potential new projects, initiatives and issues which were thought to be relevant for the next three years. These proposals will be further considered by the Executive Council during the preparation of the annual plan in the context of fit, merit and priority within the Strategic Plan. The annual planning process will give staff opportunities to further contribute within the context set by the six Goals.

Decisions on priorities for potential new projects and initiatives will be made during the preparation of the first annual plan. The availability of finances to fund such projects and initiatives will be determined after a balanced operational budget for Year 1 has been achieved. The financial performance achieved at the end of Year 1 will then shape the financial context in which priorities for new projects and initiatives will be set for Year 2 and Year 3.

The Strategic Plan therefore is a template to be actively used by the Board, Executive Council and management of the BSL over the next three years to achieve our organisation's Goals.

Page 3

STRATEGIC GOALS - 1996-1999

The Executive Council considered the priorities of these goals and, whilst acknowledging that they are all important, Goals I and 2 will have greater emphasis during 1996-1999.

Goal I is of primary importance as it is the reason for our existence. But without the achievement of Goal 2 our capacity to exist is threatened.

By addressing and achieving Goals 3 - 6 we will be making a significant contribution to the attainment of Goals l and 2.

GOAL 2 Ensuringfinancial stability

GOAL 3 Improving management

GOAL 4 Strengthening strategic influence

GOAL 5 Achieving quality

GOAL 6 Enhancing relationships

Page 4

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

THE BROTHERHOOD'S OPERATING CHARTER

Since its beginnings the Brotherhood of St Laurence has been a dynamic institution, shifting focus in response to changing needs within the community and as new opportunities have been identified.

Within the context of its Mission Statement, the Brotherhood adopts the following set of propositions as its operating charter for going forward into the next century:

The Brotherhood is a Melbourne-based organisation that has a wider regional and national impact.

The Brotherhood's charter is to work with, and for, the wellbeing and empowerment of people who are poor.

Drawing on its experience in directly providing services for some of the most neglected and needy people in our community, the work of the BSL involves the advocacy of positive social change based on policy and research.

The Brotherhood is a multi-service agency.

The Brotherhood is an organisation founded within the Anglican tradition that encourages the involvement of all people supporting its mission.

The Brotherhood is an autonomous organisation, which is committed to continuing as an independent voice for people in our community who are poor.

The capability of the Brotherhood centres around its people. The Brotherhood relies on professional workers to provide the highest quality of performance, to support the greatest possible contribution from volunteers, and to promote community self-help.

The Brotherhood's work relies upon the direct support of the community, as expressed through donations, voluntary work, good will, and grants from governments and philanthropic twsts.

The Brotherhood is accountable to its Charter, its active supporters in the community, its staff and voluntary workers and, above all, the people it seeks to serve.

The primary role of the Brotherhood's Board is to comply with its statutory obligations under its Act of Incorporation and, as custodians of the Brotherhood's Charter and values, to:

* establish the strategic directions of the organisation; * marshal the support of the community for the Brotherhood's work; * ensure good management, accountability, and financial viability; * support and assist the management team in their task of building and renewing organisational

capability; and ensure effective management succession.

The primary role of the Brotherhood's management team is to provide leadership to the organisation in both the articulation and implementation of its Charter through:

* ensuring the Brotherhood's operations are managed within a strategic framework; * marshalling the available resources of the Brotherhood for the greatest impact; * attracting, developing and inspiring paid staff and volunteers to achieve the highest standards of

service and of innovation; and * ensuring accountability and responsibility in all areas of activity, including the achievement of

financial and budget targets.

As a champion for positive social change, the Brotherhood will itself change in response to wider changes in the community and the emergence of new areas of need.

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

DECISION CRITERIA FOR SERVICE PARTICIPATION

There is a n identified n e e d

1. ' People who are poor have a demonstrable need for certain services.

Programmes can b e designed to produce posi t ive change

2. There is a viable and productive strategy to address this need.

3. The particular service creates direct opportunities for advocacy and social change.

4. The particular service is consistent with the Brotherhood's overall policies and priorities.

There is a dist inct case for the Brotherhood's involvement

5. In providing services the Brotherhood will be able to produce positive outcomes for both individuals and the community.

6. There is scope to provide services that:

* are developed in consultation with the people involved; r will demonstrate new approaches; * respond to new and emerging trends in Australia's social environment; * increase access to, and participation in, the community's services; and * underpin a wider impact through the advocacy of social justice.

7. Other agencies are not as well placed to address the challenge and the Brotherhood can make a distinctive contribution.

Represent the bes t use o f the Brotherhood's l im i ted resources

8. The specific programme complements or extends existing Brotherhood involvement in the area. providing opportunities to secure scale efficiences.

9. The programme adds to the overall effectiveness of the Brotherhood in pursuing its Mission, by creating economies of scope (synergies).

10. The programme builds upon the skills and the capabilities available to the Brotherhood.

11. The programme does not expose the Brotherhood, without due consideration, to unfunded liabilities or divert assets or resources from other priority projects.

12. The programme can be implemented within the Brotherhood's core administrative structures.

Reliance on government funding must not impose undue constraints:

13. There is scope for the Brotherhood to 'add value' over and above the terms of the service contract with government.

14. There is scope for the Brotherhood to 'top up' government funds to extend service initiatives.

15. Government funded projects' are consistent with the Brotherhood's Mission and priorities, and can be implemented within the Brotherhood's corporate planning parameters.

16. Government funding will not constrain the Brotherhood's ability to exercise its public advocacy functions.

BSL STRATEGIC PLAN 1996-1999 APPENDIX 1

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR SERVICE INVOLVEMENT

The Brotherhood's activities are founded on the principle of empowering the people it seeks to serve.

The Brotherhood will support and assist local communities to develop initiatives in new areas through empowering and seeding new ventures, but will try to avoid permanent colonisation.

The Brotherhood will give priority to the needs of people who are poor, particularly in areas that are not being addressed by other agencies, or new and emerging areas of need in the community.

The Brotherhood will give priority to areas where synergies between advocacy and services for target groups can be developed.

The Brotherhood seeks to ensure diversity of funding in order to secure its independence.

The Brotherhood will only do that which it can do well, and where it can have a 'wider impact and strategic influence.

The Brotherhood does not aspire to be simply the biggest service provider in any particular area of activity.

Dr Terry Cutler Cutler & Company 7 Leveson Street NORTH MELBOURNE 3051 Fax: 9329 9939 Tel: 9329 8411

Mr Fred Argy 16 Rossell Place FLYNN ACT 2615 Fax: 062599010 Tel: 062585540

Response! yes, ill attend 9

Response: very interested but would prefer to make a contribution in writing rather than fly down from Canberra. +XIBC to ring. d .

. .~

Professor Brian Howe The Centre for Public Policy The University of Melbourne 234 Queensbury Street Home: 6 Brennand Street CARLTON 3053 FITZROY NORTH 3068 Fax: 9349 4442

, 4 3 4 L - Tel: 9349 4-442

5,463 v/. /

Professor Brian Gallagher Department of Political Science 7 &G b &J-4'> L <+,.. The University of Melbourne PARKVILLE 3052 By Facsimile: 9344 7906 Tel: 9344 9474

MS Betty Hounslow Director - Australian Council of Social Service Level 2 - d- 619 Elizabeth Street REDFERN NSW 2012 By Facsimile: (02) 9310 4822 Tel: (02) 9310 4844, ext.212

Dr Meredith Edwards A0 -- *~~-13d ! UNIVERSITY OF CANBERRA ACT 2601 By Facsimile: (02) 6201 5384 b d ( o d >US Tel: (02) 6201 5111

(02.) 6 ~ 0 1 S o b / d i d

?&S%& ke-,

Mr John Clarke Gore Street FITZROY 3065 By Facsimile: 9417 5325 Tek94160524

Very interested but thinks it may clash with production schedule. Will check and advise. May be able to fit in with production.

Professor Ruth Fincher Department of Architecture, Building & Planning

- .

The University of Melbourne PARKVILLE 3052 By Facsimile: 9344 5532 Tek93445449

Mr Hugh Mackay C/- The Age 250 Spencer Street MELBOURNE 3000 By Facsimile: 9601 2327 Tel: 9600 4211

MS Belinda Probert Centre for Applied Social Research RMIT y s , ~ d ~ . . - c u c Q , Room 7, Level 4, Building 22 124 La Trobe Street MELBOURNE 3000 By Facsimile: 9925 1087 Tel: 9925 3292 coy-+9

-3 or .i7g<- 3273

Prof Peter Saunclers Director - &\-S h~-qv-- Social Policy & Research Centre University of New South Wales 3rd Floor Samuels Building SYDNEY NSW 2052 By Facsimile: (02) 9385 1049 Tel: (02) 9385 3833 4- 9 2.

Mr Fergus Ryan Arthur Andersen The Tower at Melbourne Central 360 Elizabeth Street MELBOURNE 3000

, A c, ( r L&- ( d c U +- J.JJpi--w (-A - (oh- i By Facsimile: 9286 8100 Tel: 9286 8000

fb

-1 )-.-'-P L& 1 F"""' £'+ s f 4 . 4 -

Mr Chris ~ i ~ ~ h , Unavailable as on leave 30/8 to 9/9 but very The Collins Hill interested and would be happy to assist at Level 7 any other time 412 Collins Street MELBOURNE 3000 By Facsimile: 9670 6326 Tel: 9670 0455

MS Heather Carmody *C L -&-LAQ World Competitive Level 7 21 Victoria Street MELBOURNE 3000 By Facsimile: 9663 2525 Tel: 9663 2944

SUITE 20 THE LINDFIELD CENTRE 12 TRYON ROAD LINDFIELD NSW 2070 TELEPHONE (02) 9416 4499 FACSIMILE (02) 9416 3150

29 July 1998

The Right Reverend Michael Challen Executive Director Brotherhood of St Laurence 67 Brunswick Street FITZROY VIC 3065

Dear Bishop Challen,

Thank you for your letter of 13 July, inviting me to join you and others in a forum designed to provide input to the development of the Brotherhood of St Laurence strategic plan for 1999-2002.

My secretary has already advised Carole Ainio that I am unfortunately unable to be in Melbourne on Friday 4 September, because of existing commitments which will keep me in Sydney at that time.

However, I wanted to respond personally to your letter, to express my regret at being unable to join you on that day, but also to assure you that I would be pleased to offer whatever help I can, at some other time, if a suitable opportunity arises.

In the meantime, may I offer you my best wishes for the success of your September forum.

Yours sincerely,

&y Hug Mackay

POSTAL ADDRESS: PO BOX 270 LINDFIELDNSW 2070 MACKAY &SEARCH PTY LIMITED A.C.N. 032 591 933

BROTHERHOOD of S! LAURENCE

67 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 3065 Victoria Australia Telephone: (03) 9419 7055 Facsimile: (03) 941 7 2691

DX 282 Melbourne

29th July 1998

Mr Fred Argy 16 Rossell Place FLYNN ACT 2615

By Facsimile: 02 62599010

Dear Fred,

Thank you for responding to my invitation to participate in our strategic thinking on 4th September next.

I appreciate your response and the difficulties you might have in making it. Of course we . would welcome any contribution you could make by responding to some questions. At the moment they have not been determined collectively but there are three questions which I would like to put to you:

1. In what way has Australia got the freedom to determine its own economy and therefore both its social and economic goals; what contribution can Australia make in the setting of social and economic goals for other nations?

2. In what areas do you see employment growth; what types of new jobs will emerge; will such jobs be available for people of less education and social confidence?

3. To what degree does the generation of new jobs require a lowering of wages? Indeed, will the lowering of wages lead to an increase in employment? If so, will such wages need to be topped up and how can this be done through the Social Security system without such people being stigmatised?

Another question which you might consider with me is if governments want to deal with fewer but larger welfare organisations, what does this mean for the Brotherhood of St Laurence. Does it necessarily mean that it shouuld become larger or can it maintain its independent and critical thinking while within a consortium?

Looking forward to seeing you on the 13th August. PS &#.&L- 7 With good wishes, ,I +F - k,&<*! Yours sincerely, . z ? G y e

T , 2 ~ ~ 4 . L U ,"

g" :.*

The Right Reverend Michael Challen Executive Director

16 Rossell Place, Flynn Flynn, ACT 2615 Phone 62585540 Fax 625990 10

The Right Reverend Michael Challen Executive Director Brotherhood of St. Laurence

Dear Michael,

Thank you for your letter of 29 July seeking my views on a number of questions. They all need careful thought and I can only give you a top of the head reaction for the'present.

The first question is crucial. We are being brain washed into thinking that because financial markets dislike fiscal deficits, high wages, business regulations, generous social support systems and high taxes, we are helpless to do anything about these things.

It is certainly true that governments are subject to more policy constraints than they were back in the 1960's. Given the increasing mobility of capital and skilled/professional people, and given the obsession of financial markets with small government, there is a higher "price" to pay for redistribution policies. But that does not mean we have lost our national autonomy on social issues. The following points are relevant.

First, the "price" we pay for increased compassion is not exorbitant. If for example we had tomorrow a government which chose to raise taxes to finance wider social and labour market programs'or which decided to run down the surplus to do so, we might find that markets demand a higher "country risk loading. But on all the evidence, after the initial dust settles, the premium industry would have to pay on its capital costs would be very small - of the order of 114 of 1 per cent. And there are offsetting economic benefits f%om having a fairer and more equal society (which I develop in my Sambell Oration and in my book) - not to mention the broader benefits for social harmony and cohesion. I find no empirical evidence that consensual countries systematically perform worse economically.

Secondly, globalization of capital markets has reinforced the importance of choosing redistribution instruments which are market neutral and transparent e.g. do it less through business regulation and more through the use of the social transfer system; and more through base broadening tax measures which reduce tax avoidance or taxes on immobile capital like land, and less through increases in corporate tax or marginal tax rates.

Thirdly, national governments should work together to develop international rules which prevent "social dumping". One suggestion I make in my book is an extension of the European Social Charter, and I notice Robert Kuttner in today's AFR argues for something similar on the basis that "a higher international floor for national social standards would defend them against market pressures to dismantle them".

On the second question you ask, I do not have adequate expertise. Some believe that the increasing relative demand of skilled relative to unskilled workers may come to an end soon (Peter Dawkins, Melbourne Uni) and the position of unskilled workers will improve. Bit I would not bet on it. I think governments will have to address the problem of surplus unskilled workers by a mixture of retrainin and by the creation of suitable jobs for them. I argue this in my book pages 147-157. &L*/Ek,*& + As to the third question, I argue against wage deregulation in my Sambell Oration. And my book develops this argument on pages 94 ff

The fourth question you ask - about the future of welfare organizations - is I'm afraid beyond me..

I am happy to pursue this correspondence hrther with you if you wish

Yours sincerely,

Fred Argy

SEW BY:

Fred Argy Fnu 02 6259 9010

"I. Ms. Aison McClelland Brothemodd of St. Laurence Fwc03 9417 2691

For putposes of your strategic meeting of 4 September, you asked me to think about the socio-economic challenges likely to c o ~ o n t Australian policy in the years ahead and the social and economic research which needs to be done to help the Brotherhood meet these challenges. IIlrave tried to put togaba some top ofthe head ideas below-

One of the big issues will he the one already identified by Bishop Challen in his letter to me of29 July viz. the dearee of d i r y fmeJom avaiLr6le to Ad~~vaUm~mrnenIs in a ghbufiu:dor QI k a \ ~ i n t e r ~ ~ t i o n ~ ~ e d e ~ y . 1 gave Bishop ~ h i l e n a first response to the quesiion in my letter of6 A u m . I suggested that the ?tustaiacd economic costs of adopting policies which are not "market friendly" (e.g. ~~itCb'kI6 to small iiscal deficits, higher taxation a d incrrased goyernment spending and resisting h t h a d o n to deragulate tbe labour market) are nnt as ov- 8s is often allegcd

But my comments were b d on casual observation of the international evidence and Australia's own historical expahce and were very judgmental in character. Clearly #here is a need f ir a comprehensive review of h literature (which is now extensive) to assess the 8conornic costs of adopting social policies viewed as unfriendly by international financial markets. I would give this high p r i i t y in your -=h p r o m But beware of these endless 1MF and OECD reports all designed to promote globalism rather than &ate governments on how best to adapt to it.

The second big challenge of the next decade will be .W.Y- dparate o ~ p i w n l p w f h . Here I stand by the themes of my book i.e. governments shautd stop pmmg themselves in ideological st~@htjaEk&p on the role ofgovernment intervention. I see a need for

- a Iess Iaissez faire appmach on short-term demand and incomes mmatpmmt - more flexibility in sating medium-termurg&s such as an m a m a 1 fiscal swpluses wd

small wmmnh - more active government involvement in promotinx a better regional spread of employment opportunities and most of all

- a much bigger government inv-nt in human capital and adive labour market pragams.

This type of agenda is anathema to many economists but offen on ideological grounds. It needs critical scnrtizty by an objective academic.

SOT BY:

A third issue of importance is ihe amg of'/kpq&Iiun d in~ ,qcnera t iml e p i q . 1 believe these problems have been deliberately hyped up for ideological reasons and I can summarize my main arguments for you if Bishop Ch&m wants.

A fourth. area br research is the distrihticd impact o~vcai17us e~nnnmic e#~rrns. On some such as reduced protection, wage deregulzdon and tax reform we have an extensive liternture to draw on . On others such as the distributional e m s ofprivatization and competition policies the iieratux is mare spars, Some research needs commissioning but most of the work would consist of symthesizing the existing literature.

Yet anutha area which seems to me to tequire W e r work althwgb 1 am sure you know more abut it thon I do, islaow ,gvwnmwdlu can be assisted &J &$M souid totgets in the same way they define aonomic targets such as GDP growth, external b a l m fiscal surplus etc.

The above would point to the desired levels ofredistrrMon. But a sixth area which needs a lot of W n g is on the apf1maImth~& or h-mmtenh- ufre&lrihrion Which ones acbieve their social objective best at least economic cost? You and I b e speculated on this question but a really rigorous a w k m it wwld be good.

I hope these rushed thoughts are h l p l l for the meeting. I would be glad tn contribute on of these issues above - subject to time and my physical condition. But many see me as old Etchiond. I suspect you wwld get mom up to date advice Born younger ecommists such as Wssin.

Pred Argy